United States: Post-Election Energy And Environment Outlook For Lame-Duck Session And The 116th Congress

Beth Viola is a Senior Policy Advisor, Michael Obeiter
is a Senior Public Affairs Advisor and Isabel Lane is a Public
Affairs Advisor in theWashington D.C.office

HIGHLIGHTS:

Although energy and environmental issues are not expected to be
among the top priorities for either party in the 116th Congress,
this Holland & Knight client alert addresses several
opportunities for limited bipartisan compromise on these subjects
over the next two years.

With Democrats regaining control of the House in the midterm
elections, the introduction, consideration and House passage of
ambitious bills on climate and clean energy could be possible in
the 116th Congress.

The lame-duck congressional session could see movement on tax
and public lands issues particularly pertinent to the energy and
environment sectors.

The 2018 midterm elections are in the books, and while some
races are still too close to call, control of both the U.S. House
of Representatives and the Senate are no longer in doubt. The
members of the 116th Congress spent a disproportionate amount of
time and money campaigning on the issues of immigration,
healthcare, taxes, trade and allegations of corruption.
Accordingly, energy and environmental issues are not expected to be
among the top priorities for either party in a divided
government.

With Democrats regaining control of the House, the introduction,
consideration and House passage of ambitious bills on climate and
clean energy could be possible. Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi has
also pledged to reconvene a select committee on climate change that
could lead efforts on such legislation and conduct oversight should
she be re-elected Speaker of the House. However, stronger
Republican control in the Senate – to say nothing of the
legislative filibuster – means these bills are not likely to
receive a vote in the Senate and will be primarily used as
messaging instruments for Democrats.

While partisan disagreement may stymie progress on the issues
central to the 2018 campaign, energy and environment could present
a number of opportunities for limited bipartisan compromise in the
coming years. Perennial legislative subjects such as
transportation, infrastructure and tax reform could be used as
vehicles for bills that couldn't otherwise pass on their own.
This Holland & Knight client alert highlights those areas
– from energy efficiency to public lands – that present
opportunities for legislative progress. This is not intended to be
a comprehensive catalogue of all possible legislation that may move
in this space; rather, these are the issues expected to dominate
the time and political appetite of the congressional committees of
jurisdiction as well as the national conversation on energy and
environment during the upcoming lame-duck congressional session and
over the next two years.

What to Expect in Lame-Duck Session

As of this writing, the House and Senate are each scheduled to
be in session for just four weeks between the elections and the
convening of the 116th Congress in January. But given the results
of the elections, this lame-duck session is likely to be a flurry
of activity, as Republicans work to pass as much of their agenda as
possible before they lose control of the House. Democrats,
meanwhile, will be aiming to push consideration of as much as
possible into the 116th Congress in hopes of growing their
footprint on legislation such as the Farm Bill. Here's what to
look out for through the end of the year.

Appropriations: Despite a concerted effort from
Republicans, Congress was unable to enact all 12 government funding
bills before the end of the fiscal year (FY) on Sept. 30, 2018,
though all have been voted out of committee in both chambers. Five
have been enacted into law (Defense, Energy and Water, Labor/Health
and Human Services/Education, Legislative Branch, and Military
Construction/Veterans Affairs), and the rest were temporarily
extended through Dec. 7, 2018, as part of a so-called
"continuing resolution."

With much work left to be done – particularly on a
potential Commerce/Justice/Science, State/Foreign Operations and
Homeland Security package, which has not yet entered conference
negotiations – appropriations could take up much of the
oxygen over the coming weeks. House Republicans will likely make a
push to include their political priorities as riders on
appropriations bills before losing control of the chamber;
meanwhile, Senate Republicans will likely struggle to find enough
support from their Democratic colleagues to reach the 60-vote
majority needed to pass these packages without making concessions.
Alternatively, Democrats may push for a continuing resolution
through the start of the 116th Congress in hopes of more closely
aligning those bills with their political priorities.

Notably, President Donald Trump has signaled a willingness for a
partial government shutdown should Congress fail to send him a bill
with adequate funding to construct a wall on the U.S.-Mexico
border. Such a proposal is unlikely to garner the 60 votes needed
to overcome a Democratic filibuster in the Senate. Trump has
wavered on his veto threats in the past, and time will tell whether
the midterm results have strengthened his resolve or revealed a
newfound willingness to compromise – if, of course, Congress
is able to work out a deal to send him before the end of the
year.

Tax extenders: In some years, a deal on
"tax extenders" addressing expiring provisions throughout
the tax code has been packaged with the end-of-year appropriations
legislation. With several expiring provisions on the energy front,
including some with bipartisan support like the biodiesel blenders
credit, there is likely to be an effort to pass at least a small
package of bills addressing the expiration of some more popular
provisions. Democrats typically favor tax extenders, which could
create an opening for a win-win negotiation before the end of the
year, though many Republicans oppose the coupling of appropriations
and tax extenders, signaling an uphill battle to passage – if
Congress is able to wrap FY 2019 appropriations before the start of
the 116th Congress.

Should such a package move forward, it likely won't include
major changes to energy tax provisions. The two parties, and the
two chambers, have committed to phasing down tax credits for
various forms of clean energy. While some House Republicans may
push to eliminate some or all of those credits, as they have in the
past, those efforts are likely to fall short again.

Public lands: The Sept. 30, 2018, expiration of
the Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF), one of Congress's
most popular conservation programs, could create an opening for
bipartisan cooperation on a public lands deal in the lame-duck
session. Although the expiration of the LWCF affects only its
sources of funding rather than disbursement, as of Sept. 30 the
fund is no longer authorized to continue drawing revenue from a
variety of sources, primarily oil and gas leases on the Outer
Continental Shelf (OCS).

As there is broad, bipartisan support for reauthorization of the
LWCF, ultimately some kind of reauthorization is all but certain.
Congress is currently grappling with three issues pertaining to the
nature of this reauthorization:

Whether the fund should be permanently authorized to
draw revenues from the OCS, rather than requiring legislative
reauthorization. There is broad, bipartisan support for
permanent reauthorization, and it is very likely to be a component
of any final deal reached on the LWCF.

The balance of disbursements of LWCF funds between
states and federal land acquisition. Many members,
particularly Republicans, would like to see more emphasis on state
funding and less on land acquisition; amendments addressing this
question are expected should a permanent reauthorization bill come
to the floor in either chamber.

Whether the disbursement of funds should continue to be
subject to the annual appropriations process or if mandatory
funding for the program is desired. Legislative proposals
to permanently reauthorize the LWCF differ on this point, though
there is strong support in the Senate for S. 569, the Land and Water Conservation
Authorization and Funding Act of 2017, which would make the funding
mandatory and remove it from the appropriations process. This would
ensure that revenue taken in from OCS leases is directly disbursed.
Introduced by Sen. Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.) with 48 bipartisan
cosponsors, S. 569 passed out of the Senate Energy and Natural
Resources Committee on Oct. 2, 2018, by a vote of 16-7. This tees
up the potential for a Senate floor vote in the coming weeks. The
mandatory funding component stands a tougher test in the House;
earlier this year, the House Natural Resources Committee cleared by
voice vote a version that permanently reauthorized the LWCF but
left the funding as discretionary.

There is significant political will cutting a path toward
passage before the end of the year. Permanent reauthorization is
among the top priorities for Sen. Richard Burr (R-N.C.), who has
previously single-handedly derailed major Republican-backed
legislation in an effort to push through LWCF. Republican leaders
in the Senate will want to avoid meeting this fate once again.
Moreover, House Natural Resource Committee Chairman Rob Bishop
(R-Utah) said recently, "[w]e will solve the problem before
the end of the year. Whether it's Sept. 30 or Dec. 1
doesn't make a damn bit of difference."

A final deal may be passed as standalone legislation, but it is
more likely to be tacked onto a package of public lands bills teed
up for the lame-duck session or an end-of-year appropriations deal.
The lame-duck deal could potentially include another compromise
bill, H.R. 6510, that would create a dedicated
funding source to address billions in the maintenance backlog in
national parks and other public lands.

Nominations: With Republicans maintaining
control of the Senate, there likely won't be a rush to confirm
all outstanding nominees. However, some of the more controversial
nominees could be approved during the lame-duck session in the
interest of clearing a nomination backlog and obviating the need
for President Trump to re-nominate his selections next year and
draw additional, unwanted attention to them. These include the
nominees for Chair of the Council on Environmental Quality, a
commissioner on the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC), an
Assistant Secretary of the Interior, and two Assistant
Administrators at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA).

What to Expect in the 116th Congress

Shifting to what can be expected from the 116th Congress,
legislation could be possible on energy, tax, public lands and
more. Expectations for each of these sectors are detailed
individually below.

Energy Legislation

With deep disagreements between the parties on the necessity and
scale of efforts to address climate change, the role of government
in supporting new energy technologies and many other facets of
federal energy policy, gridlock will be more likely than any
significant breakthroughs. But there are more areas where
groundwork has been laid for bipartisan agreement than many casual
observers would expect. In the 116th Congress, advances in grid
resilience, advanced nuclear power, and carbon capture and
sequestration, among other issues, can be expected.

Comprehensive Legislation

Congress has not passed major energy legislation since 2007,
though bipartisan negotiations between the House and Senate almost
resulted in a breakthrough in late 2016, with the Energy Policy
Modernization Act of 2015passing the Senate with 85 votes and the
North American Energy Security and Infrastructure Act of
2015passing the House, 249-174. The House and Senate ultimately
failed to reach a compromise as they reconciled the differences
between the two bills. Though each bill was more limited in scope
than some critics hoped, they included language on grid
modernization and resilience, including both cybersecurity and
physical protections; energy efficiency incentives, performance
contracting and reauthorizations of U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)
efficiency programs; hydropower licensing; and reauthorizations of
some DOE clean energy research programs.

During the past two years, there was a tacit acknowledgment that
the political dynamics had not changed enough to reach a different
outcome, though Sens. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) and Cantwell did
introduce a bill – the Energy and Natural Resources Act of
2017 (S. 1460) – that was largely identical to
the 2015 bill, save some revisions to the energy efficiency
sections whose elimination was unpopular with environmental
groups.

With Democrats in charge of the House, the Energy and Commerce
Committee is apt to pass a series of smaller bills for House
leadership to package into something resembling the Senate bill; on
passage, these bills would go to conference to work out the
differences between the two versions, and odds are good that
Congress succeeds in making at least some of these provisions law.
Although any successful bill is unlikely to comprehensively
transform the American energy landscape, the most likely outcome is
legislation that looks a lot like S. 1460, plus or minus additional
DOE programmatic reauthorizations and potential reforms to the DOE
loan guarantee program.

RFS Reform

Stakeholder groups interested in the Renewable Fuel Standard
(RFS) – namely obligated parties in the oil industry, the
ethanol industry (including feedstock producers), the advanced
biofuels industry delivering fuels with higher greenhouse gas (GHG)
emissions reductions and environmental groups working to reduce GHG
emissions – have differing priorities when it comes to the
RFS. Given the electoral politics that resulted in his election,
President Trump has thus far prioritized the needs of the ethanol
industry and farm interests with support of both Republicans and
Democrats from corn-growing states. Meanwhile, EPA and
congressional Republicans representing states with a heavy oil and
gas presence have committed to working with refiners to lower
compliance costs for obligated parties, and a number of
congressional Democrats continue to support fuels that deliver
significant GHG reductions, prioritizing the environmental aspects
of the program.

In reforming the RFS, obligated parties want to reduce their
compliance costs; proposals that have circulated on Capitol Hill in
the last year include placing a cap on the cost of the D6 Renewable
Identification Number (RIN) for ethanol from corn and sorghum, and
granting RINs for exported ethanol. Additionally, they continue to
seek compliance waivers under the RFS, including waivers for the
unrealistic statutory mandates and more exemptions for "small
refineries," which the Trump Administration has defined
broadly. They will also likely advocate for limited ethanol
blending mandates after 2022.

The ethanol industry continues to oppose any statutory changes
to the RFS and is working to protect their blending mandates
post-2022. The industry will also continue trying to increase
opportunities for blending through regulatory avenues; for example,
by allowing the blending of E15 year-round, which President Trump
announced as a priority in October, with or without direction from
Congress.

Environmentalists will seek to limit the production and blending
of corn ethanol given the limited GHG emissions reductions
associated with the fuel and their concerns about land use change
in the U.S. and abroad. To this end, they will look to phase down
or phase out the conventional ethanol mandates, further support the
advanced and cellulosic sectors through technical changes to the
RFS and maintaining mandates for those fuels, and create a source
of funding for RFS-related conservation activities.

Congress, particularly the House Energy and Commerce
Subcommittee on Environment, laid significant groundwork in the
115th Congress on a potential compromise deal between these
interests. Both chambers can build on this progress and revive
momentum on RFS reform in the 116th Congress, especially as 2022
approaches. The RFS does not necessarily "sunset" in 2022
as many believe; however, the current statutorily mandated blending
requirements will be supplanted by ones established by the EPA, DOE
and U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), which could further
politicize the annual renewable volume obligation (RVO)
process.

With Democrats regaining the House, a renewed focus on climate
could set up the opportunity to broker a deal that limits federal
support for conventional ethanol, satisfying both the oil industry
and environmental groups at the expense of the ethanol industry.
However, with Republicans maintaining control of the Senate,
advancing an RFS reform bill that satisfies at least two the four
stakeholder groups mentioned above will continue to prove
challenging for the Senate Environment and Public Works (EPW)
Committee in the 116th Congress.

The current makeup of the EPW Committee is farm state-heavy,
particularly on the Republican side, meaning a deal between
environmentalists and the oil industry that is disadvantageous to
corn ethanol will face an uphill battle in the upper chamber. As in
the 115th Congress, there will be opportunity for the
committee's Democrats to garner support from a handful of
Republicans for such a proposal. However, committee leadership on
RFS reform has been lacking thus far. Without a Democratic champion
on the issue, this political dynamic has produced stalemates in
recent years on RFS-related subjects such as E15. Should Democrats
choose to prioritize this issue in the 116th Congress as the party
advances its climate agenda, an EPW Committee champion for RFS
reform could without a doubt grease the wheels for a deal to be
brokered before 2020.

Tax Legislation

Energy-Related Tax Credits

Republicans were able to pass a sizeable tax reform package in
2017 without Democratic votes, but it is doubtful either party will
be able to enact such wide-reaching changes in the next Congress.
Instead, there could be some nibbling around the edges and perhaps
some legislative fixes to unforeseen loopholes in last year's
tax bill, potentially packaged to assist with political messaging,
as H.R. 6760, or "Tax Reform 2.0," was used this year
after passing the House of Representatives.

In terms of energy tax issues, there likely won't be enough
support to get any changes to the clean energy investment and
production tax credits, which are being phased out over the next
few years. However, the tax-writing committees may take up a few of
the remaining "orphan tax extenders," energy provisions
accidentally left out of the grand tax extender bargain reached in
2015 with the PATH Act. While many of these provisions were
afforded longer-term extension in the tax extenders package passed
in February 2018, several energy efficiency and biofuels credits
were given only one-year, retroactive extensions. The House Ways
and Means Committee held a series of hearings in the 115th Congress
in an attempt to move toward making permanent or eliminating some
of these credits. While the House's appetite for this issue may
shift with Democrats gaining control, expect a bipartisan effort to
address these extenders in an effort to avoid the annual
end-of-the-year political shuffle to extend these provisions.

Moreover, changing Senate Finance Committee dynamics could help
grease the wheels on this front. The Senate Committee has typically
led the charge on energy tax provisions, and with current Chairman
Orrin Hatch's (R-Utah) upcoming retirement, Sen. Chuck Grassley
(R-Iowa) is next in line for the gavel should he opt to relinquish
his chairmanship of the Judiciary Committee. A perpetual champion
for the orphan energy extenders, especially the biofuels credits,
Grassley's chairmanship could create opportunities for
bipartisan cooperation on an energy tax agreement. Should Grassley
choose to remain at the helm of the Judiciary Committee, Sen. Mike
Crapo (R-Idaho) is on deck for the Senate Finance Committee; his
position on the tax extenders is less certain.

Carbon Tax

The idea of a market-oriented tax on GHG emissions has been
slowly gaining momentum on Capitol Hill, though conservative
support so far has largely come from outside the halls of Congress.
Significant developments on this issue over the next two years are
unlikely, but supporters will be keeping an eye on two trends that
will serve as bellwethers for the prospect of a national carbon tax
early 2020s.

First, the establishment of the Climate
Leadership Council has given high-profile Republicans such as
James Baker, George Shultz and Gregory Mankiw a platform and a
reasonably detailed proposal to rally behind. The proposal has the
support of a number of major corporations – including
multinational oil and gas, health and personal care, and automotive
companies – many of whom are also contributing money to the
associated advocacy campaign run by Americans for Carbon Dividends. Although
outside Republican support for a carbon tax is not new, a committed and well-funded lobbying
campaign supported by multinational corporations and respected
Republican statesmen and economists has the potential to move the
needle over time.

Second, 2018 saw the introduction of the MARKET CHOICE Act (H.R.
6463) by recently ousted Rep. Carlos Curbelo (R-Fla.) and two
Republican colleagues. While the bill was less ambitious than many
of those introduced by Democrats in the House and Senate, it
nevertheless marks an important milestone in the long-running
debate over whether and how to address GHG emissions. The Climate
Solutions Caucus in the House, with 45 members from each party
immediately prior to the election, offers an imperfect but
potentially valuable forum for socializing the idea of a carbon tax
and other climate change legislation. This said, changes in the
Caucus are imminent with the election downfall of Curbelo, its
current Republican leader from Florida's 26th district.

Republican support inside and outside of Congress, and the
support of major oil and gas and manufacturing interests, are
necessary but not sufficient predicates for a national carbon tax.
Moreover, the industrial and commercial sectors could have more
appetite for a negotiation on this front should they continue to
face the prospect of sector-by-sector regulations on emissions from
the industrial and commercial sectors despite the Trump
Administration's efforts to deregulate. And while catastrophic
and expensive natural disasters have further elevated discussions
around climate change and adaptation, the odds that Congress will
turn to a carbon tax as one potential way to raise revenue for a
substantial infrastructure bill or other spending priorities
remains low for the foreseeable future.

Storage and Electric Vehicles
(EVs)

Another area in which there might be some substantive movement
is in energy storage and electric vehicles. With battery costs
falling rapidly and demand for increased resilience from both
utilities as well as end-users on the rise, the industry may need
additional government support to move beyond lithium-ion technology
and to maintain a U.S. manufacturing base.

Bipartisan proposals to create and expand tax incentives on both
of these issues were introduced in the 115th Congress, one or both
chambers could move toward substantive consideration of these
proposals over the next two years.

Public Lands Legislation

Should the lame-duck session not prove fruitful for a deal to
reauthorize the LWCF, the bipartisan, bicameral appetite to support
the program will drive certainly drive momentum for swift action in
the 116th Congress. This may take the form of standalone
legislation or a broader public lands package as discussed above in
the lame-duck section.

Recent Republican-led efforts to reform the listing process
under the Endangered Species Act, national monument designations
under the Antiquities Act, and other environmental and lands
statutes will face significant opposition from the now
Democrat-controlled House Natural Resources Committee. That said,
it's possible that smaller, more targeted efforts to reform
certain aspects of these programs that could garner bipartisan
support. Bipartisan activity is also possible on the Recovering
America's Wildlife Act, which redirects fees from federal
energy and mineral leases to state-led wildlife conservation
efforts. Introduced on a bipartisan basis in both chambers in
Congress and having received committee consideration on the House
side in the 115th Congress, this bill will likely continue to gain
momentum in 2019.

Given the divided government, Democratic priorities at the
Natural Resources Committee will likely focus on oversight. Topics
that could be quickly addressed as the 116th Congress kicks off
include Puerto Rico's recovery from Hurricane Maria, President
Trump's efforts to speed environmental impact review of dams
and canals in California, and concerns about possible ethics
violations by Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke. Legislatively, the
Committee could quickly move through a handful of bills for the
purpose of messaging, such as proposals to permanently withdraw
lands from mining operations. However, because anything highly
partisan will inevitably be dead on arrival in the Senate, along
with numerous competing Democratic priorities from other
committees, the prospects of such proposals securing a vote on the
House floor are less certain.

Federal funding for wildfire prevention and response has also
been a perennial bone of contention. The FY 2018 omnibus spending
bill included a bipartisan deal to afford new budget authority to
the U.S. Forest Service and USDA to combat wildfires. Disbursement
of these funds are still in progress, and Democrats may move
appropriations language to narrow how this money will be spent,
while Republicans may push for broader acceptable uses, such as
additional forest clearing.

Appropriations

Generally speaking, over the past year, Republican leadership
has insisted on a return to "regular order" in passing
annual government funding bills; i.e., they have tried to pass all
12 bills before the end of the fiscal year and have found success
by curtailing the practice of attaching unrelated policy provisions
to appropriations bills. With the House Freedom Caucus decrying
spending levels and the 60-vote threshold to overcome a filibuster
in the Senate, appropriators have worked in a bipartisan manner to
get these bills over the finish line.

What that means in practical terms is that funding levels for
most agencies have remained level or increased over the past two
years, despite President Trump's veto threats and Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) Director Mick Mulvaney's severely
pared-down budget requests. Going forward, expect more of the same.
In a divided government, it is usually in both parties'
interest to keep the government running, which would seem to rule
out any significant funding cuts or drastic increases.

To that end, expect level or increasing funding for
discretionary DOE research programs. Both parties have agreed on
increasing support for research activities such as grid security
and advanced nuclear. With Democrats gaining the upper hand in the
House, a continuation of this trend is likely, along with
potentially increased support for renewable energy or
technology-neutral programs.

Oversight and Investigations

With Democrats regaining control of the House, they have also
regained subpoena power; as such, an onslaught of investigations,
records requests and committee hearings can be expected. While most
of those will not be energy-related – for example, President
Trump's tax returns, business dealings of cabinet secretaries
before and during their government service, anything to do with
election interference or the Robert Mueller investigation –
Democratic committee and subcommittee chairmen will do their best
to require the political leadership of federal agencies to use
their time and staff resources to respond to requests and prepare
for oversight hearings.

The list of energy-related topics likely to be a focus of
congressional committees includes:

hurricane response in Puerto Rico

scientific advisory boards at EPA and other agencies

energy industry influence in decision-making at EPA, DOE and
other agencies

ethics concerns at the Departments of Interior, Energy and
EPA

the Trump Administration's treatment of climate
science

the proposed replacement of the Clean Power Plan with the
Affordable Clean Energy rule

Additionally, the early months of the 115th Congress saw an
unprecedented surge in the utilization of the Congressional Review
Act (CRA) to overturn Obama-era regulations that were finalized in
the last six months of 2016. Democrats could return fire in the
116th Congress, though with less success given the larger
Republican majority in the Senate. Moreover, President Trump is
unlikely to sign any legislation that would undo his own
rulemakings. Rather, CRA resolutions should be seen as a way for
Democrats to focus and force votes on what they consider to be
unpopular moves by the administration. And with CRA resolutions
being a privileged vehicle in the Senate – they can't be
filibustered, and can be introduced and voted on at any time, by
any member – they are also a means to slow down Senate
business with Republicans expanding their majority in that
chamber.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general
guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought
about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

The US Supreme Court may be poised to review two 2018 decisions in the Fourth and Ninth Circuits, both of which applied the so-called ‘hydrological connection" theory to extend jurisdiction of the Clean Water Act ("CWA") to cover pollutants that reach surface waters via groundwater.

This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).

Email Address

Company Name

Password

Confirm Password

Position

Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests

Accounting

Anti-trust

Commercial

Compliance

Consumer

Criminal

Employment

Energy

Environment

Family

Finance

Government

Healthcare

Immigration

Insolvency

Insurance

International

IP

Law Performance

Law Practice

Litigation

Media & IT

Privacy

Real Estate

Strategy

Tax

Technology

Transport

Wealth Mgt

Regions

Africa

Asia

Asia Pacific

Australasia

Canada

Caribbean

Europe

European Union

Latin America

Middle East

U.K.

United States

Worldwide Updates

Registration (you must scroll down to set your data preferences)

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including your content preferences, for three primary purposes (full details of Mondaq’s use of your personal data can be found in our Privacy and Cookies Notice):

To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting to show content ("Content") relevant to your interests.

To enable features such as password reminder, news alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.

Mondaq hopes that our registered users will support us in maintaining our free to view business model by consenting to our use of your personal data as described below.

Mondaq has a "free to view" business model. Our services are paid for by Contributors in exchange for Mondaq providing them with access to information about who accesses their content. Once personal data is transferred to our Contributors they become a data controller of this personal data. They use it to measure the response that their articles are receiving, as a form of market research. They may also use it to provide Mondaq users with information about their products and services.

Details of each Contributor to which your personal data will be transferred is clearly stated within the Content that you access. For full details of how this Contributor will use your personal data, you should review the Contributor’s own Privacy Notice.

Please indicate your preference below:

Yes, I am happy to support Mondaq in maintaining its free to view business model by agreeing to allow Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors whose Content I access

No, I do not want Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors

Also please let us know whether you are happy to receive communications promoting products and services offered by Mondaq:

Yes, I am happy to received promotional communications from Mondaq

No, please do not send me promotional communications from Mondaq

Terms & Conditions

Mondaq.com (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd (Mondaq). Mondaq grants you a non-exclusive, revocable licence to access the Website and associated services, such as the Mondaq News Alerts (Services), subject to and in consideration of your compliance with the following terms and conditions of use (Terms). Your use of the Website and/or Services constitutes your agreement to the Terms. Mondaq may terminate your use of the Website and Services if you are in breach of these Terms or if Mondaq decides to terminate the licence granted hereunder for any reason whatsoever.

Use of www.mondaq.com

To Use Mondaq.com you must be: eighteen (18) years old or over; legally capable of entering into binding contracts; and not in any way prohibited by the applicable law to enter into these Terms in the jurisdiction which you are currently located.

You may use the Website as an unregistered user, however, you are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the Content or to receive the Services.

You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these Terms or with the prior written consent of Mondaq. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information from the Content. Nor shall you extract information about users or Contributors in order to offer them any services or products.

In your use of the Website and/or Services you shall: comply with all applicable laws, regulations, directives and legislations which apply to your Use of the Website and/or Services in whatever country you are physically located including without limitation any and all consumer law, export control laws and regulations; provide to us true, correct and accurate information and promptly inform us in the event that any information that you have provided to us changes or becomes inaccurate; notify Mondaq immediately of any circumstances where you have reason to believe that any Intellectual Property Rights or any other rights of any third party may have been infringed; co-operate with reasonable security or other checks or requests for information made by Mondaq from time to time; and at all times be fully liable for the breach of any of these Terms by a third party using your login details to access the Website and/or Services

however, you shall not: do anything likely to impair, interfere with or damage or cause harm or distress to any persons, or the network; do anything that will infringe any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights of Mondaq or any third party; or use the Website, Services and/or Content otherwise than in accordance with these Terms; use any trade marks or service marks of Mondaq or the Contributors, or do anything which may be seen to take unfair advantage of the reputation and goodwill of Mondaq or the Contributors, or the Website, Services and/or Content.

Mondaq reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to take any action that it deems necessary and appropriate in the event it considers that there is a breach or threatened breach of the Terms.

Mondaq’s Rights and Obligations

Unless otherwise expressly set out to the contrary, nothing in these Terms shall serve to transfer from Mondaq to you, any Intellectual Property Rights owned by and/or licensed to Mondaq and all rights, title and interest in and to such Intellectual Property Rights will remain exclusively with Mondaq and/or its licensors.

Mondaq shall use its reasonable endeavours to make the Website and Services available to you at all times, but we cannot guarantee an uninterrupted and fault free service.

Mondaq reserves the right to make changes to the services and/or the Website or part thereof, from time to time, and we may add, remove, modify and/or vary any elements of features and functionalities of the Website or the services.

Mondaq also reserves the right from time to time to monitor your Use of the Website and/or services.

Disclaimer

The Content is general information only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice or seek to be the complete and comprehensive statement of the law, nor is it intended to address your specific requirements or provide advice on which reliance should be placed. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the Content for any purpose. All Content provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers hereby exclude and disclaim all representations, warranties or guarantees with regard to the Content, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Mondaq expressly excludes all representations, warranties, obligations, and liabilities arising out of or in connection with all Content. In no event shall Mondaq and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use of the Content or performance of Mondaq’s Services.

General

Mondaq may alter or amend these Terms by amending them on the Website. By continuing to Use the Services and/or the Website after such amendment, you will be deemed to have accepted any amendment to these Terms.

These Terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and you irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales to settle any dispute which may arise out of or in connection with these Terms. If you live outside the United Kingdom, English law shall apply only to the extent that English law shall not deprive you of any legal protection accorded in accordance with the law of the place where you are habitually resident ("Local Law"). In the event English law deprives you of any legal protection which is accorded to you under Local Law, then these terms shall be governed by Local Law and any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with these Terms shall be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts where you are habitually resident.

You may print and keep a copy of these Terms, which form the entire agreement between you and Mondaq and supersede any other communications or advertising in respect of the Service and/or the Website.

No delay in exercising or non-exercise by you and/or Mondaq of any of its rights under or in connection with these Terms shall operate as a waiver or release of each of your or Mondaq’s right. Rather, any such waiver or release must be specifically granted in writing signed by the party granting it.

If any part of these Terms is held unenforceable, that part shall be enforced to the maximum extent permissible so as to give effect to the intent of the parties, and the Terms shall continue in full force and effect.

Mondaq shall not incur any liability to you on account of any loss or damage resulting from any delay or failure to perform all or any part of these Terms if such delay or failure is caused, in whole or in part, by events, occurrences, or causes beyond the control of Mondaq. Such events, occurrences or causes will include, without limitation, acts of God, strikes, lockouts, server and network failure, riots, acts of war, earthquakes, fire and explosions.

By clicking Register you state you have read and agree to our Terms and Conditions